Your preferred cooking temps

[PaulstheRibList]

Love the question!!

One thing I've discovered recently, is that each cooker has different airflow & temp distribution, as well as a different place it likes to "settle in" at, and all that makes a difference.

I cut my teeth smoking St. Louis cut spares on my 22.5 WSM's. I still cook my best Memphis Dust ribs on the WSM, 6 hours at 225.

My big cabinet smoker seems to need a little higher temp, 250, to get bark formation more like the WSM.

For Brisket, I'm starting to like 275 as my go-to temp, to get the bark formation and fat rendering that I find dead-solid-perfect.

Most recent learning is that my new Jambo Backyard really likes 300 degrees on the Tru Tel positioned at grate level. The interesting thing is I'm NOT seeing overcooking or even faster cooking on the Jambo at that 300 temp than I would on the cabinet smoker at 275, but this is only preliminary talking, I've only cooked on the Jambo a dozen times and I need to keep some more notes on it. Also, I haven't put a maverick inside the pit to do some testing yet for comparison. With my new Kindling Cracker I can certianly get the wood size smaller which helps the Jambo not go higher - when I put full size splits in there sometimes the temp climbs a little more.

Guess that's a sign unto me that I should load up the cooking grate with meat to keep that temp more even!

[_John_]

Howdy,

Forgive my newbie question, I haven't been around here too long!

I noticed that the majority of (non-poultry) recipes here on the site talk about using 225F.

Would anyone care to say a few words on what other temp(s) they'd cook at, and why?

The original post above mentioned a new way and an old way, which is which? :-)
-Eric

225 is the "old way" or traditional way that you hear about on most sites and most books. All of my fellow PBC'ers (Pit Barrel Cooker) cook at 275, many if not most restaurants cook at 275+ because less time and less fuel = less costs for what we believe is the same end result. It is quite a difference in time as well, 5-8 hours faster to cook at 275 vs 225.

[Breadhead]

The old way 225°... Hmmm. That's a couple of hundred years of tradition.

The new way... 275° - Cheaper + less time consuming... Hmmm (cheaper maybe).

The same result... Hmmm (I don't think so)

My own opinion is that your Pit Barrel Cooker is simply not comfortable/controllable at 225°, 240° or 250° and so you go to 275° where you can control it. So you may be forced to wrap it to get it done on time.

I've never wrapped a pork butt, a brisket or ribs during a cook. Plus... I've rarely ever been late serving smoked meat.

Can those 2 different processes produce the same finished product? Can 1 method be better than the other?
Does either process reduce the actual ACTIVE man hours required to achive the desired results?

I would like to CHALLENGE the Moderator's Guest & Guest & Guest to study your claim.

You may in fact be correct but... I personally don't think so.🤔

[Ray]

So _John_ is it time to re-write the rule book of low-and-slow cooking technique to show 275F is the temp of choice?

[DWCowles]

Here's my take on people that cooks at 275. (1) PBC'ers cannot maintained 225 F. (2) Some people is to lazy to maintain 225 F. (3) They don't care as long the meat is donequicker because like Breadhead they failed to plan. (4) They drink so much that 275 looks like 225 (me). 😂

[Breadhead]

😆 I may be old but 1 thing I know...

It takes no, zero, zilch less time to cook an 8 hour cook than it does a 16 hour cook.

The extra 8 hours is ALL waiting time. Those that fail to plan - plan to fail... John Wooden.

That gives me lots of time to bake bread to complement my meal.😆

[_John_]

Breadhead Why do the moderators need to test it? You can do it yourself. I have many posts and many tests.
Just because I'm in the mood:

The old way 225°... Hmmm. That's a couple of hundred and years of tradition.
It is tradition, but nowhere near "couple of hundred" years, we haven't, nor did they try, to track and maintain a temp. Low i'm on board with, 225 they had no way of knowing. Also tradition says a lot of stupid things, that's kind of the point of this site, to steer people to science and not tradition. Though tradition is often right, it is from trial and error not from knowledge.

The new way... 275° - Cheaper + less time consuming... Hmmm (cheaper maybe).
Definitely both cheaper and quicker, not sure what your point is unless for some reason you think things cooking at 225 cook just as fast as 225 but I have read several of your posts and you seem smarter than that, so not sure why you question it.

My own opinion is that your Pit Barrel Cooker is simply not comfortable/controllable at 225°, 240° or 250° and so you go to 275° where you can control it. So you may be forced to wrap it to get it done on time.
Mostly incoherent, there are at least a dozen posts here on how to maintain a 225 temp on the PBC, no need to go to 275 to "control it", I can control any temp I want from 175-400 on my PBC. Again with the 275 not getting done on time, might be second guessing my assumptions...

I've never wrapped a pork butt, a brisket or ribs during a cook. Plus... I've rarely ever been late serving smoked meat.
So admittedly totally and willfully ignorant on the subject, but perfectly willing to lambaste those who have tried and actually do have an understanding.

You may in fact be correct but... I personally don't think so.
My opinion is based on my own observances and personal experiences/preferences, yours are based on complete and utter ignorance.

Does either process reduce the actual ACTIVE man hours required to achive the desired results?
Better is indeed qualitative, that's why I mention preferences above, temperatures are not, so suggesting it takes the same amount of time at much higher temps is absurd and I reject my earlier statements of plausible knowledge.

You mention my Pit Barrel Cooker, and obviously don't know what I have or cook on other than that, I am perfectly capable of cooking many temperatures on a variety of machines, your assumptions otherwise are based on ignorance, but you seem perfectly willing to not let that stop you.

I have much more to say on the matter, but after writing the above I feel you are not worth the time and energy, which I will now devote toward finding out how to block disrespectful and ignorant commenters.

[Breadhead]

John... I apologize if I've offended you in any way. That was not my intent.

We can agree to disagree and still be Pit friends I hope.😆

We use different cookers and we both get good results. That's really all that matters.👍

[_John_]

Ray I don't think you could really claim it to be that, I think some meats might be better at different temps, like we know poultry to be. Personally I am still testing, but so far, pork butts and briskets are 275 for me simply for the time savings without sacrificing flavor. Of course I also advocated wrapping, after extensive testing I changed my mind. I don't think it is one or the other, try them all and find what turns out the best product for you.

[David C]

225F for years, but after reading Franklin's book (and eating some of his BBQ) have been experimenting with temps up to 275F. Don't really know if he cooks up there because he has a lot of meat to get through each shift or not, and not sure I have an opinion about what temp I prefer. I'm also guilty of moving around within the range to try to get dinner ready about when people are hungry.

[David Parrish]

Keep the flames out of The Pit folks. _John_ Breadhead

We're all friends here. It's fine to talk to the virtues of 225 F versus 275 F but it's not ok to throw out "you're failing to plan" and "you're ignorant" jibes at each other.

Personally, I've gotten the best low and slow results when I cooked at 225 F the entire cook, however, when I'm constrained for time I've found higher temps to be an excellent compromise. Specifically, cranking up the heat to 275 F during the stall and cooking 225 F before and after the stall seems to give me 95% or better of the result versus cooking solely at 225 F and shaves off several hours of cook time.

My experience with the PBC is that it turns out great food simply and works best when you let it run at the temp it wants to run at. Because it lacks precise temperature control the results aren't quite as good as using a smoker that does have precise control, but the result is still outstanding and a very good way to go if you need great food simply and more quickly than 225 F allows.

[Huskee]

The way I see it is sometimes I decide I wanna cook at 225, other times I wanna shoot for 240 thinking I might shave off a half hour. It's kinda like when I drive into town. Some days it's 55, other days it's 63 and I watch out for cops. It all works out in the end.

[_John_]

Breadhead I may have just taken it the wrong way, no big deal really. Now that I have my process down over 100 butts or so it is time to muck with it again, I actually plan on cooking one at 225 this weekend to see if my improved skill leads to an improved end product.
In my early days of getting this down I was pretty adamant about wrapping butts, and I think they were better than my unwrapped ones. Once I was really good at them I decided to try unwrapped and sure enough it was a better product. I cooked ribs recently at 225 that were my best yet so I figured it was time to try a butt at 225 again to see if my that has changed with experience as well. There are a few things i'm hoping it will do, and logically it seems like it would, but I don't know if it actually will so I will soon see!

[Breadhead]

Happy mucking my friend... Take pictures.🍻

[_John_]

I have pictures of almost every cook, before and during the process, but get bombarded afterward and almost never get an end result pic. My 3 year old loves my phone so any time she finds it unattended she takes it and it is my camera.

[_John_]

Well, results seem to point to y'all being no help at all I would have thought more people would be 225 but it appears to be about even. So the question is do we need to try more 225, or do more people need to try >225?

[Breadhead]

_John_ ...

The traditional method of BBQ is low & slow!!!

That requires planning. When do you want to serve the food is the 800 pound gorilla in the room.😡

Knowing your cooker is vastly important.

Once you have those 2 issues covered... YOU get to pick your method.

Low & slow or defy tradition and see how you can break the rules and still produce ok/good/great BBQ.

Know this... The preparation time takes EXACTLY the same amount of time for either method.

The hot and fast method adds elements to the cook. Hotter temps evaporate more water content from the meat, you can end up with drier meat.

I prefer to plan ahead and go low & slow. Once you stabilize your cooking temperature your hands on labor is over!

Do you want to plan for a 14/16 hour pork butt/brisket cook or a 8/10 hour cook?

My humble opinion is that you will get a better product going low and slow.

[vandy]

I like to cook pork at 225 but at this juncture I am still learning my Lang 36 Hybrid and sometimes still have trouble keeping it at that temp. I hope to use it a lot this summer so I can become more proficient at controlling the temps. The best pork butt that I have cooked is a couple of years ago when I found this site and used Meatheads Memphis Dust as a rub and had no injection and did not wrap it, I cooked that thing at 225 on my Traeger for around 16 to 18 hours I think and when it got to an internal temp of around 195 the thing was black and looked like a meteorite like Meathead said it would but the taste was awsome, the bark was a little dry but the taste was excellent especially when mixed with the moist meat on the inside of it.

[Spinaker]

250 F to 275 F most of the time. 325 F for chickens.

[MattBilling]

Excellent thread. After watching Tuffy Stone's brisket video I think I'm going to test out the temperature one of my Uglies this weekend without anything in there, monitor it for 8-10 hours and see how Old Bob likes to cook. I feel a bit bad I've been holding him back all these years!